The Government understands that it is
asking a lot of farmers wanting to take part in the Carbon Farming Initiative.
The commitment asked of farmers is significant, to ensure that credits
generated by the scheme meet the strictest global standards, according to
parliamentary secretary for climate change, Mark Dreyfus. "Australia comes
to this with a very high reputation for scientific integrity, for regulatory
integrity. We're expecting that Australian carbon credits will be in world
demand for those reasons.” he said. Australian farmers will benefit from having
to meet high standards to earn carbon credits. To earn credits for native
revegetation projects, for example, that land must be locked up for 100 years.
But will the enthusiastic buyers find any
growers willing to take the risk of signing a contract that lasts longer than
their lifetime? Will the rules that make CFI Carbon Credits so attractive to
buyers have the reverse effect on sellers?
Could it be that locking up land is
overkill, especially in the environmental plantings methodology?
1. The methodology requires a planting density that reaches only 20%
‘crown cover’ at maturity, leaving 80% of the project area grassy vegetation
that will need grazing to avoid baring of the soil due to desertification (rank
and dead grasses stifle fresh grasses emerging).
2. The carbon in the understory is not factored into the sequestration
equation anyway.
3. Occasional grazing can reduce fire loads.
4. The methodology itself makes allowances for occasional grazing from
3 years after establishment.
Carbon Faming is not about locking
productive land up. It is about making the land more productive by integrating
trees and shrubs into the farm design. A change in practice is more attractive
to a farmer if it has a production benefit.
But Mark Dreyfus says there is some good
news: farmers will not face financial penalties if the credits they've earned
are destroyed by a bushfire or drought. Now you're talking.
No comments:
Post a Comment